Meghan Markle and Prince Harry continue to be the center of media scrutiny, with every action dissected, criticized, and often spun into controversy. The latest backlash stems from their visit to wildfire-affected areas in Los Angeles, where they were accused of engaging in “disaster tourism.” Critics claim that their public show of compassion was merely a PR stunt, pointing to their history of high-profile media engagements. But the question remains—why does their every move spark such intense reactions?

A Convenient Distraction?

One of the most glaring aspects of this ongoing discourse is the sheer volume of attention Meghan and Harry receive compared to other members of the royal family. While Kate Middleton and Prince William face increasing speculation about their personal lives, including rumors of marital troubles, the focus remains firmly on the Sussexes. Could it be that Meghan and Harry serve as a convenient distraction? The royal family has long been known to strategically shift public attention when necessary, and the intense criticism of the Sussexes often coincides with difficult moments for other senior royals.

Why Should Meghan and Harry Care About Cancer Announcements?

One of the recurring criticisms leveled against the Sussexes is that their recent business announcements, including Meghan’s Netflix series With Love, Meghan, coincided with major health updates from the royal family. Critics argue that their timing was insensitive, as King Charles and Kate Middleton’s cancer diagnoses had just been made public. But why should Meghan and Harry be held accountable for events beyond their control? They did not cause the illnesses, nor were they in a position to manage the timing of their own professional endeavors around royal health news.

The expectation that Meghan and Harry should delay or cancel their projects due to unrelated events within the royal family is, at best, unrealistic. At worst, it reinforces the notion that they are still bound by an institution they deliberately distanced themselves from. Meanwhile, Prince William and Kate have continued their own public engagements without similar backlash. This double standard raises an important question: is the criticism truly about timing, or is it about maintaining a narrative that paints Meghan and Harry as selfish and out of touch?

Performative Compassion vs. Selective Outrage

Another major talking point is the accusation that Meghan and Harry only show compassion when the cameras are rolling. Detractors argue that their visit to wildfire victims was staged, citing claims that volunteers were cleared from the area for photo opportunities. Yet, the same critics have little to say about similar PR engagements by other royals.

Furthermore, why is it assumed that Meghan and Harry have an obligation to show compassion in a way that satisfies the public? They are private citizens, no longer funded by the British taxpayer, and are free to choose their causes. The idea that their past family tensions should disqualify them from engaging in charitable work is a weak argument at best. Compassion is not a finite resource—showing kindness to one group does not require reconciliation with another.

Why Does the Public Care So Much?

Perhaps the most fascinating question in this ongoing saga is: why does the public care so deeply? Comment sections on videos and articles are filled with people passionately condemning Meghan and Harry, often with the same intensity as if they were discussing political scandals or major global crises. Some argue that their disdain stems from Meghan’s alleged treatment of palace staff, while others claim Harry betrayed the monarchy. But these explanations do not fully account for the level of vitriol.

The reality is that Meghan and Harry have become symbols in a much larger cultural debate—one that extends beyond the British royal family. Their departure from royal life, their outspoken nature, and their perceived rejection of traditional institutions have made them polarizing figures. For some, they represent modern independence and self-determination. For others, they symbolize entitlement and a rejection of duty.

The Bigger Picture: Will This Ever End?

It is clear that Meghan and Harry are unlikely to escape public scrutiny anytime soon. But at some point, the narrative will have to shift. The obsession with their every move has created an echo chamber where the same criticisms are repeated endlessly. Meanwhile, Meghan and Harry continue to live their lives, securing business deals, engaging in philanthropy, and raising their children.

Despite the negativity, there remains an undeniable truth—Meghan and Harry are resilient. Their ability to withstand relentless criticism and still move forward is, in itself, a testament to their determination. Whether one loves or hates them, they remain influential figures, carving out their own space in a world that refuses to let them go.

If nothing else, the continued media frenzy surrounding them proves one thing: Meghan and Harry are still winning, simply by staying relevant.